CHAPTER- 24

E N G I N E E R I N G P R O P E R T I E S OF HARD
ROCK MASSES

24.1 Hard Rock Masses

Hard rock masses are encountered in a majority of countries and extensive underground
excavation work is being carried out through such rocks. It is planned to discuss the
engineering properties of hard rock masses in this chapter separately for ready reference.

The properties of hard rock masses are required for designing engineering structures. Hard
rock is defined as rock material having UCS of more than 100 MPa. On the other hand, hard
rocks are geologically very old and have well developed and highly weathered joints.
Therefore, there may be serious problems of rock falls and seepage in tunnels due to such
joints, if left unsupported. Experience shows that a hard rock is a misnomer as engineers may
believe that it will not pose problems of instability. The deceptive nice appearance created
many construction problems in the past in the tunnels of South India, upper Himalaya, Alps
and the U.S.A.

24.2 Modulus of Deformation

In the case of rock foundations, knowledge of deformation modulus of rock masses is of

prime importance. The geomechanics classification is a useful method for estimating in-situ
deformability of rock masses (Bieniawski, 1978). As shown in Figure 6.3, the following
correlation is obtained:

Ed = 2 RMR - 100 GPa (24.1)

where E d is in-situ modulus of deformation in GPa for RMR > 50, and RMR is discussed in
Chapter 6.

24.3 Uniaxiai Compressive Strength (UCS)

Grimstad and Bhasin (1995) have proposed the following correlation for mobilized uniaxial
crushing strength (UCS) for good and massive rock masses in tunnels:

qcmass = 7 7' fc Q13 9 MPa (24.2a)

237
 Rock Mass Classification: A Practical Approach in Civil Engineering

where fc = qc for Q > 10 and q c > 100 MPa, o t h e r w i s e fc = 1, a n d y i s u n i t

100
weigth of the rock mass in gm/cc.

Laubscher (1984) found UCS for hard rock masses in mines which is also nearly the same as
above UCS (Eqn. 24.2a).

(RMR- rating for qc)

qcmass = qc. (24.2b)
106

24.4 Uniaxial Tensile Strength (UTS)

Uniaxial tensile strength of a rock mass is obtained by using Eqn. 24.3

qtmass = 0.029. y. fc. Q0.3 MPa (24.3)

24.5 Strength Criterion

The UCS of massive hard rock mass is approximately the same as that of its rock material.
However, small size correction in qc is needed as shown in Eqn. 10.4. The shear strength of
hard rock masses proposed by Hoek and Brown (1980) is proportional to average value of
UCS of the rock material qc (after size correction),

(24.4)
o.1 - o'3 + [m. qc. o'3 -'- s. q2]12

For massive rock masses, s = 1

7. 7'. qcQ 1;3
For tunnels / caverns, s 1/2 -- strength reduction factor and
100
m
= s 1/3

mr

For slopes, rock parameters 'm' and 's' are related to Geological Strength Index (GSI) in
Chapter 25, which may be used for slopes, dam abutments and foundations.

In the case of overstressed dry massive hard rocks, sudden failure by rock bursts may take
place as in Kolar Gold mines in India and hard rock mines in South Africa. Chances of rock
burst will be more if a hard rock is of Class II type (Chapter 3). In weak rock masses,
squeezing may take place rather than violent failure.

238
 Engineering properties of hard rock masses

Reservoir Induced Seismicity (RIS) is more pronounced due to dam reservoirs in hard rocks,
e.g. Koyna Hydroelectric Project, India, etc. In weak rock masses, RIS is low due to its high
damping characteristics.

24.6 Support Pressure in Non-squeezing/Non-Rock Burst Conditions (H< 350 Q1/3)

The ultimate support pressure in underground caverns with overburden H in metres may be
found from Eqn. 8.10 which is also produced here as Eqn. 24.5

0.2 1;3
Pult = f. Q- , MPa (24.5)
Jr

where f = 1 + (H-320)/800 > 1

Tunnels may be self-supporting where its width or diameter B is less than the self-supporting
span B s given by,

Bs = 2. Q0.4 metres (24.6)

General requirements for permanently unsupported openings are,

(a) Jn < 9, J,. > 1.0, Ja < 1.0, Jw =1.0, SRF < 2.5

Further, conditional requirements for permanently unsupported openings are given below.

(b) If RQD < 40, need Jr, < 2

(c) If Jn = 9, need Jr > 1.5 and RQD > 90
(d) If Jr = 1.0, need Jw < 4
(e) If SRF > 1, need Jr > 1.5
(0 If span > 10 m, need Jn < 9
(g) If span > 20 m, need Jn < 4 and SRF < 1

In the geologically old and matured hard rock masses, joints may be highly weathered due to
very long period of weathering. Thus, small wedge failures in unsupported tunnels are not
uncommon. Further, water charged rock masses may also be encountered, particularly during
heavy rainy seasons.

24.7 Half- Tunnels

Half tunnels generally, have been excavated along hill roads passing through steep hills in
hard rocks (Figure 24.1). Such tunnels are most common in H.P., India. The top width Bht has
been estimated from 11 case records of half- tunnels,

239
 Rock Mass Classification." A Practical Approach in Civil Engineering

/
/

Hill 5lop
. / ~ L i n e of Intersection
/ of 2 Joint Sets
/
/
/
/

~--B ht ----~

/ Hard Rock

Figure 24.1: Half-tunnel along hill roads in hard rocks

Bht = 1.7 Q0.4 metres (24.7)

Joints at these sites were discontinuous and the number of joint sets were not more than two
with Q > 18 (SRF = 2.5). These unsupported half-tunnels have been stable for more than 2
decades. The factors of safety of wedges formed by 2 joint sets and slope were found to be
more than 3 against sliding along inclined lines of intersection of joint planes (Figure 24.1).
These half-tunnels saved ecological disturbance because near vertical cut-slopes would be
very closely and ecologically unsound. The half-tunnels are also tourist attraction and
considered engineering marvel.

Referen ces

Bieniawski, Z. T. (1978). Determining Rock Mass Deformability: Experience from Case

Histories, Int. Jr. Rock Mech. and Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr., Pergamon,Voi. 15, pp.
237-247.
Laubscher, D. H. (1984). Design Aspects and Effectiveness of Support System in Different
Mining Conditions, Trans. Inst. Mining and Metallurgy, Voi. 93, pp. A70-81.

240
 Engineering properties of hard rock masses

Mehrotra, V. K. (1996). Failure Envelopes for Jointed Rocks in Lesser Himalaya, Jr. Rock
Mech. and Tunnelling Technology, India, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 59-74.
Singh, Bhawani., Viladkar, M. N., Samadhiya, N. K. and Mehrotra, V. K. (1997). Rock Mass
Strength Parameters Mobilized in Tunnels, Jr. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology, Pergamon, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 47-54.

241